Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: The Charlwood Fifty
Replies: 52   Last Post: Jun 24, 2013 10:24 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Nasser Abbasi Posts: 6,677 Registered: 2/7/05
Re: The Charlwood Fifty
Posted: May 23, 2013 7:29 AM

On 5/23/2013 4:32 AM, Albert Rich wrote:
> There has been much discussion in recent sci.math.symbolic posts about the performance
>of various systems on 10 integration problems from Kevin Charlwood's 2008 article
>"Integration on Computer Algebra Systems". An appendix to his article includes 40 more problems.
>
> It seems to me if these problems are going be used as a test-suite, we should start
>by trying to reach consensus as to what the best answer is. To that end I have posted a pdf file at
>
> http://www.apmaths.uwo.ca/~arich/CharlwoodIntegrationProblems.pdf
>
> showing the 50 integrals and the best antiderivatives I have found so far. This was
>done with the help of the article as well as Mathematica, Maple, Rubi and Derive.
>
> If you should find substantially better ones and would like to improve the test-suite,
>please post them on sci.math.symbolic so I can include them in the Charlwood Fifty.
>Substantial improvements include significantly simpler and more compact, involve
>elementary rather than special functions, involve special rather than hypergeometric
>functions, real rather than complex, continuous rather than discontinuous, etc.
>
> Albert
>

fyi;

I've run the first 10 integrals only on M 9.01, Rubi4 and Maple 17.

Used your PDF above as the correct/expected result and came with a draft
result table. Few of the results of CAS are too large to
know by looking at the result if they are the same as what you showed,
so this needs additional simplification and other means to find out.

I've put a "?" next to those until it is decide for sure if these
are "correct" or not. Most likely they are correct but not optimal.

All the notebooks I've used are here also:

http://12000.org/my_notes/ten_hard_integrals/report.htm

Here is current result, any one please feel free to correct, and
I will update it

integral---->1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
==================================================
M 9.01------>OK OK ? OK No ? No ? ? OK====> 4/10
Rubi4------->No OK ? No ? Ok ? OK OK OK====> 5/10
Male 17----->Ok Ok ? ? ? OK OK ? No No====> 4/10

--Nasser